Posted on 07/29/2013 8:12:44 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
He has touched upon the sore spot of the Mass in the ancient rite. Ratzinger permitted its celebration for all. Bergoglio has prohibited it for one religious order that favored it
by Sandro Magister
ROME, July 29, 2013 – One point on which Jorge Mario Bergoglio was eagerly expected to weigh in, after his election as pope, was that of the Mass in the ancient rite.
There were those who predicted that Pope Francis would not distance himself from the stance of his predecessor. Who had liberalized the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite as an “extraordinary” form of the modern rite, with the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum" of July 7, 2007:
> Benedict XVI Liberalizes the Ancient Rite of the Mass – And Explains Why
and with the subsequent instruction "Universæ Ecclesiæ" of May 13, 2011:
> Two Masses for a Single Church
And there were instead those who prognosticated on the part of Francis a restriction - or even a cancellation - of the possibility of celebrating the Mass with the rite prior to Vatican Council II, even at the cost of contradicting the decisions of Benedict XVI with him still alive.
To read the decree issued by the Vatican congregation for religious shortly before the voyage of Francis in Brazil, with the explicit approval of the pope himself, one must agree more with the latter than with the former.
The decree bears the date of July 11, 2013, the protocol number 52741/2012, and the signatures of the prefect of the congregation, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, a focolarino, and of the secretary of the same congregation, Archbishop José Rodríguez Carballo, a Franciscan.
Braz de Aviz is the only high-ranking official in the curia of Brazilian nationality, and because of this he has accompanied Francis on his voyage to Rio de Janeiro. He has a reputation as a progressive, although that of a scatterbrain fits him better. And he will probably be one of the first to go when the reform of the curia announced by Francis takes shape.
Rodríguez Carballo instead enjoys the pope's complete trust. His promotion as second-in-command of the congregation was backed by Francis himself at the beginning of his pontificate.
It is difficult, therefore, to think that pope Bergoglio was unaware of what he was approving when he was presented with the decree before its publication.
The decree installs an apostolic commissioner - in the person of the Capuchin Fidenzio Volpi - at the head of all the communities of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.
And this in itself is cause for astonishment. Because the Franciscans of the Immaculate are one of the most flourishing religious communities born in the Catholic Church in recent decades, with male and female branches, with many young vocations, spread over several continents and with a mission in Argentina as well.
They want to be faithful to tradition, in full respect for the magisterium of the Church. So much so that in their communities they celebrate Masses both in the ancient rite and in the modern rite, as moreover do hundreds of religious communities around the world - the Benedictines of Norcia, to give just one example - applying the spirit and the letter of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum" of Benedict XVI.
But precisely this was contested by a core group of internal dissidents, who appealed to the Vatican authorities complaining of the excessive propensity of their congregation to celebrate the Mass in the ancient rite, with the effect of creating exclusion and opposition within the communities, of undermining internal unity and, worse, of weakening the more general "sentire cum Ecclesia."
The Vatican authorities responded by sending an apostolic visitor one year ago. And now comes the appointment of the commissioner.
But what is most astonishing are the last five lines of the decree of July 11:
"In addition to the above, the Holy Father Francis has directed that every religious of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is required to celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite and that, if the occasion should arise, the use of the extraordinary form (Vetus Ordo) must be explicitly authorized by the competent authorities, for every religious and/or community that makes the request.”
The astonishment stems from the fact that what is decreed contradicts the dispositions given by Benedict XVI, which for the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite “sine populo" demand no previous request for authorization whatsoever:
"Ad talem celebrationem secundum unum alterumve Missale, sacerdos nulla eget licentia, nec Sedis Apostolicae nec Ordinarii sui" (1).
While for Masses "cum populo" they set out a few conditions, but always guaranteeing the freedom to celebrate.
In general, against a decree of a Vatican congregation it is possible to have recourse to the supreme tribunal of the apostolic signatura, today headed by a cardinal, the American Raymond Leo Burke, considered a friend by the traditionalists.
But if the decree is the object of approval in a specific form on the part of the pope, as it seems to be in this case, recourse is not admitted.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate will have to comply with the prohibition on celebrating the Mass in the ancient rite beginning Sunday, August 11.
And now what will happen, not only among them but in the whole Church?
It was the conviction of Benedict XVI that "the two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching." He had explained this in the heartfelt letter to the bishops of the whole world with which he had accompanied the motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum":
> "With great trust and hope…"
But from now on this is no longer the case, at least not for all. For the Franciscans of the Immaculate, forced to celebrate the Mass only in the modern form, there remains just one way to take to heart what Benedict XVI also hoped: to "demonstrate" in this form as well, "more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage."
The fact is that one pillar of the pontificate of Joseph Ratzinger has been cracked. By an exception that many fear - or hope - will soon become the rule.
__________
(1) Curiously, even six years after its publication, the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” of Benedict XVI continues to be present on the website of the Holy See only in two languages, and these among the least-known: Latin and Hungarian.
__________
The website of the Franciscans of the Immaculate:
> Francescani dell'Immacolata
__________
There is a thorough pro-and-con dispute over the “Summorum Pontificum” in a book hot off the presses by Professor Pietro De Marco of the University of Florence and the liturgist Andrea Grillo:
A. Grillo, P. De Marco, "Ecclesia universa o introversa?", Edizioni San Paolo, Cinisello Balsamo, 2013.
In criticizing the motu proprio of Benedict XVI, Grillo rejects even its prescriptive validity. Because in his judgment, the missal prior to Vatican Council II has been abrogated. And therefore there is no longer any reason that could justify its use.
Grillo teaches sacramental and liturgical theology at the Pontifical Atheneum of Saint Anselm in Rome.
__________
English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.
Are you a follower of Pope Benedict or Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II? (Hint:You can’t do all at once!)
Pope John Paul II heaped praises upon Father Marcial Maciel, despite warnings about the degenerate.
Pope Benedict properly declared Maciel to be “untouchable”.
Yet, Pope Francis appoints a flaming homosexual to run the Vatican bank. Pope Francis says, “Who am I to judge judge them (homosexuals)”. How in the world can this man hear confessions, if he can’t judge them?
How many times did Benedict XVI refer to himself, specifically, as the Vicar of Christ? In other words, how many times did he say:
Answer: zero. (He referred to the occupant of the position, generically, as the Vicar of Christ...but there are no citations of him calling himself, personally, that title)
Actually, I'm a follower of Christ.
Exactly what part of "Summorum Pontificum" do you and you're "religious orders" not understand?
We order that everything We have established with these Apostolic Letters issued as Motu Proprio be considered as "established and decreed", and to be observed from 14 September of this year, Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, whatever there may be to the contrary.
From Rome, at St. Peter's, 7 July 2007, third year of Our Pontificate.
Pope Benedict XVI
So says Desmond Tutu and Nancy Pelosi.
“Actually, I’m a follower of Christ.”
So you reject his Popes?
Silly post.
Sorry, Brian, I don't see it that way. We're dealing with a religious order here, not multiple religious orders, not secular clergy...one religious order. Obedience to their superiors is first and foremost the key there.
Remember, from Summorum Pontificum:
Art. 3. Communities of Institutes of consecrated life and of Societies of apostolic life, of either pontifical or diocesan right, wishing to celebrate Mass in accordance with the edition of the Roman Missal promulgated in 1962, for conventual or "community" celebration in their oratories, may do so. If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues.
I don't really see the great, huge controversy.
Thanks, I hope and pray you are right.
The problem is that “Modernism” is a heresy. It was defined in 1907 by Pope St. Pius X in his encyclical “Pascendi Dominici Gregis.” The short definition of this heresy is that one can believe anything one wants, because who knows what Truth is, anyway?
It is impossible to believe 2 contradictory things at the same time. Either the Church teaches the Truth, or it is full of errors and heresy. I believe our Church is in the greatest crisis since the heresy of Arianism.
We need some bishops to stand up and proclaim the Truth, like St. Athanasius did.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!
I'm also concerned about the vocations to the FI's now, as many of the brothers are also attached to this liturgy. On both counts, this doesn't seem to be very helpful from a pastoral perspective.
Brian, you have better connections than I do. Perhaps you could locate a copy of the Apostolic Visitor's report. There is likely something more going on than meets the eye.
You might be right...but I personally see a whole lot of smoke and very little fire here.
Remember, both Sandro and Andrea are Italian and they write that way.
Take it easy.
Hey n00b, just a suggestion from somebody who’s been around here a little bit longer than you...you might want to take some Kaopectate for that diarrhea of the keyboard you’re having. You’re not going to win any fans here. Just a friendly suggestion.
I actually agree...but I am more concerned that modernist diocesan bishops who haven't yet succumbed to the "chronological solution" (shall we say delicately) may use this as an excuse to unjustly place restrictions on clergy in their dioceses.
But jubilation on the part of the modernists or needless, inappropriate apocalyptic visions of doom on the part of the orthodox do nothing to help.
Well, you yourself are using hyperbole toward the end of that. I don't see criticism as needless, either, because every avalanche starts with a single snowflake on a slippery slope. We would be negligent to not point out incremental movements in an undesirable direction.
And that's fine...be cautious. But being cautious is not the same as having visions of doom.
Incorrect. There were a variety of official "Latin Masses" around prior to the time of the Council of Trent, and they existed in MANY different forms and variations, ALL of which were in use in the Catholic Church. Some of the pre-1570 Latin masses that the Catholic Church used, such as the Milanese and Mozarabic liturgies (which began in the 7th century), were in no way related to what became the Tridentine Mass and only had a vaguely similar structure.
The "standard" Roman rite Mass introduced by Pope Gregory had MANY additions and variations introduced over the next several hundred years, and didn't become the dominant liturgy in the Catholic Church until the 1300s. The Gallican Rite was certainly more "ancient" and widely in use in the Catholic Church, but it was gradually replaced with Roman rites and died out in the middle ages. The Roman rite continued to undergo many changes after that time: there were at least 14 different variations of the "standard" Roman Missal printed between 1474 until 1570. The Roman Missal also didn't become obligatory for all Roman Catholic parishes until the Council of Trent, and many Catholic parishes continued to use, other, unrelated Latin masses prior to that time.
A good case can be made that that the Syrian rites are more "ancient". That type of liturgy was introduced prior to the Council of Chalcedon in 450 AD and has remained relatively unchanged for hundreds of years, and is still in use today in some Catholic Churches such as the Maronite Church. They also commonly use Aramaic as the liturgical language, and Aramaic and Greek predate the Latin language as the standard language for liturgical celebrations. Every historian will tell you that the East Syrian liturgy is certainly much older than ANY type of Latin mass.
“You’re not going to win any fans here. “
Not looking for any from your ilk, Bub.
“he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.”
I had a weird insulting dialogue with ebbtide a couple of days ago.
My advise steer clear of this insulting kid who has a problem with his internet usage.
I fear we are back to the bad old days where pastoral concern is only extended in the modernist direction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.